Petraeus replacement to testify CIA never requested military assistance in Benghazi

posted at 8:51 am on November 15, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

So says Eli Lake of The Daily Beast, getting tips from his sources within the intelligence community. Michael Morell, who became acting Director of Central Intelligence following the surprise resignation of David Petraeus, will appear before the Senate Intelligence Committee today to discuss the agency’s response to the attack on the Benghazi consulate. Morell will testify that no one at the agency requested military assistance during the seven hours of the terrorist attack that killed four Americans, including two CIA operatives:

When the CIA’s acting director, Michael Morell, testifies Thursday before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, he is expected to say that the agency never requested Europe-based special operations teams, specialized Marine platoons, or armed drones on the night of the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, Libya, according to a senior U.S. intelligence official.

The disclosure may put an end to one line of inquiry into the Benghazi affair about why reinforcements from the region were not sent on the night of the attack. “Assistance from the U.S. military was critical, and we got what we requested,” the senior U.S. intelligence official said.

According to a Pentagon timeline made public last week, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta prepared multiple military responses from the region at around midnight Benghazi time, more than two hours after the initial assault began. Those orders included mobilizing two special Marine platoons known as Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team (FAST) from Rota, Spain, to deploy to Tripoli and Benghazi. Panetta also ordered a special operations force, training in central Europe, to deploy at the Signonella Airbase in Italy. Another special operations team based in the United States also prepared to deploy to Libya.

The CIA, however, requested none of that assistance. Neither did the State Department. None of those teams ever arrived in Benghazi.

That differs from what Fox News reported almost three weeks ago, and which has gone virtually unchallenged in the vacuum of official explanations about Benghazi since. Jennifer Griffin reported on October 26th, citing sources that were actually “on the ground” in Benghazi during the attack, that the CIA contingent repeatedly requested assistance — but were told to “stand down” twice by officials in the CIA chain of command:

Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that three urgent requests from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. Consulate and subsequent attack nearly seven hours later were denied by officials in the CIA chain of command — who also told the CIA operators to “stand down” rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.

Former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were part of a small team who were at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. Consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When they heard the shots fired, they radioed to inform their higher-ups to tell them what they were hearing. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. An hour later, they called again to headquarters and were again told to “stand down.”

Woods, Doherty and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the Consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The quick reaction force from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the Consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.

At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Specter gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. The fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours — enough time for any planes based in Sigonella Air base, just 480 miles away, to arrive. Fox News has also learned that two separate Tier One Special operations forces were told to wait, among them Delta Force operators.

Morell will testify that the CIA team received two forms of military assistance, apparently on the CIA’s request, although that’s not clear — an unarmed surveillance drone and a medevac team when the CIA squad on the ground was able to extract the remaining Americans to the airport. It’s certainly possible that this is true, and that Griffin got it wrong, even though Griffin claimed multiple sources who were on the ground during the attack.

But Morell’s explanation, as related by Lake, doesn’t make a lot of sense. If the consulate and the CIA annex was under heavy and deliberate attack by forces using mortars and RPGs, why wouldn’t they ask for the military assistance that they knew was on standby for just this sort of contingency? Why just ask for an unarmed surveillance drone rather than something that could potentially offer a diversion for the extraction of personnel from the consulate? It’s difficult to imagine that the intelligence unit under fire off an on for seven hours would never have requested military assistance to save the lives of the people in the compound — not impossible, perhaps, but certainly implausible.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

But Morell’s explanation, as related by Lake, doesn’t make a lot of sense. If the consulate and the CIA annex was under heavy and deliberate attack by forces using mortars and RPGs, why wouldn’t they ask for the military assistance that they knew was on standby for just this sort of contingency?

You see, Ed, those were good patriotic Americans at that consulate willing to give their lives for their country. They didn’t need no stinkin’ backup.

Is this really the story they’re going with? I think the YouTube video explanation was more believable.

It’s difficult to imagine that the intelligence unit under fire off an on for seven hours would never have requested military assistance to save the lives of the people in the compound — not impossible, perhaps, but certainly implausible

Well golly gee, we WOULD have sent reinforcements and gosh darnit we wanted to, but those guys taking heavy fire for 7 hours and dying, while we watched via live camera on the drone, well heck they just never ASKED us to!

I don’t give an F what the cia did or not do. Obama was watching this from the comfort of his living room. Why wasn’t he calling people and asking are we doing anything to help them and if not, why not?

….and Jennifer Griffin or others like her had better learn like those in the U.K. are learning. There is a chill wind of tyranny blowing across the West.

Freedom is declining. Government power is rising.

LONDON (AP) — One teenager made offensive comments about a murdered child on Twitter. Another young man wrote on Facebook that British soldiers should “go to hell.” A third posted a picture of a burning paper poppy, symbol of remembrance of war dead.

All were arrested, two convicted, and one jailed — and they’re not the only ones. In Britain, hundreds of people are prosecuted each year for posts, tweets, texts and emails deemed menacing, indecent, offensive or obscene, and the number is growing as our online lives expand.

Lawyers say the mounting tally shows the problems of a legal system trying to regulate 21st century communications with 20th century laws. Civil libertarians say it is a threat to free speech in an age when the Internet gives everyone the power to be heard around the world.

“Fifty years ago someone would have made a really offensive comment in a public space and it would have been heard by relatively few people,” said Mike Harris of free-speech group Index on Censorship. “Now someone posts a picture of a burning poppy on Facebook and potentially hundreds of thousands of people can see it.

“People take it upon themselves to report this offensive material to police, and suddenly you’ve got the criminalization of offensive speech.”

That implies that BHO is something other than the intellectually deficient and lazy bastard we’ve seen for four years now. IMO, this was a group decision based on political expediency of keeping the Arab Spring myth alive ahead of the election.

In short the decision to let those Americans die was based on campaign strategy and not the demands of the Presidency.

I don’t believe a word coming from this administration, period. What is clear is that there was inadequate security, that Stevens was fearful of an attack, that our gov’t didn’t do all it could to protect them nor treat the attack with the seriousness it deserved. POTUS flew off to Vegas for fundraisers the next day, and they continued to tell the American people it was just the video.

Those are the facts, and those alone are an indictment of this admin and Obama’s “leadership”.

If Morrell is going to insist on this “narrative,” then one has to ask why the CIA was in Benghazi to begine with and why is there so much cloak-and-dagger about this whole operation? Who or what is being protected here?

Well golly gee, we WOULD have sent reinforcements and gosh darnit we wanted to, but those guys taking heavy fire for 7 hours and dying, while we watched via live camera on the drone, well heck they just never ASKED us to!

AttilaTheHun on November 15, 2012 at 8:59 AM

OH you mean they have to ASK for it??…. someone forgot to put that in the memo….

and so the coverup begins. Problem is for Obama, it started to late, their are people and paper trail that shows the CIA is lieing.

God, we have the CIA, FBI, State department, department of defense, attorney general, ambassitor to the UN, generals, mistresses, press etc. covering up the malpractice of Obama in the murder of our 4 hero’s.

My view is pretty simple- During the campaign season Obama wanted to portray that he was great in fighting terrorism (getting bin laden) and that his moves in Libya were effective. When the terrorism happened in Libya it destroyed his meme. This is where obama made his fatal mistake, when our embassy came under attack, he chose to continue his campaign strategy rather than help our heroes.

This shows you the lack of character and home that ambitious punk in the white house is. In the end the truth will come out no matter how hard the press covers for him.

It is not about the cia, it’s about obama policy failures – and state and defense who support them. Al Quada and terrorism are not dead – as barry wants us to believe, they are alive and well. It was not dealt a fatal blow, but attacked our embassy. It was barry and his cohorts who spread misleading information about the attack – sending his bff rice around to spread disinformation. Can we get him to testify, under oath what he knew and when did he know it ?

That implies that BHO is something other than the intellectually deficient and lazy bastard we’ve seen for four years now. IMO, this was a group decision based on political expediency of keeping the Arab Spring myth alive ahead of the election.

In short the decision to let those Americans die was based on campaign strategy and not the demands of the Presidency.

I know and the storm can be used for part of it, but BLS has made revisions for every month of Obama’s presidency and, if look back to December 2011, you’ll see a sharp DROP in first time claims down to under 400K. The figure stays in the 350K to 400K range from December 2011 until today — one week AFTER the election.

The Dems thought this was a political witch hunt that would disappear after the election – the President thought it was a bump in the road to his “flexibility” – When both turned out false, a sex scandal involving a Republican Guy (according to Chuck Todd) popped up.

Petraeus speak up for the love of pete
cmsinaz on November 15, 2012 at 8:55 AM
Not going to Happen, Petraeus isnt going to change his testimony the Ratline(washington DC) always protects itself.
ChunkyLover on November 15, 2012 at 9:05 AM

……and now that he won’t it’s time to revise some pesky little details. …..Er like taking mortar fire and they were fine with that. Nothing here… move on.

I have a picture on my work computer desktop of the Tomb of the Unknown Solider. My coworker came by and said he can’t understand why we spend money on something like that. He’s okay with the 26 year old kids on health insurance but thinks guarding the Tomb is a “waste” of money.

So how will they square what Morell says today vs. what Petreaus says today? Why would Petreaus continue to take bullets for the CIA if it didn’t happen? Maybe because he’s STILL being blackmailed? It’s just sick that Petreaus would throw away years of service for this POS in the Whitehouse.

So we’re to believe that no assistance was provided because the CIA never requested it? How does that square with Obama supposedly ordering his national security team to do “whatever was necessary” to aid the beleagured personnel in Benghazi?

Let’s face it, the voters who showed up at the polls cared more about their free stuff, than the fact that the Commander in Chief left 4 souls twisting in the wind while they were slaughtered by islamic terrorists.

And the press in this country helped to keep this story buried so baracka claus could be re-elected.

I have a picture on my work computer desktop of the Tomb of the Unknown Solider. My coworker came by and said he can’t understand why we spend money on something like that. He’s okay with the 26 year old kids on health insurance but thinks guarding the Tomb is a “waste” of money.

I almost punched him in the nose.

gophergirl on November 15, 2012 at 9:21 AM

You should’ve socked him. Sadly, I’m betting you’ll find that the majority opinion among the Left. They don’t respect the sacrifice made by our men and women in uniform and think that’d be money better spent handed out to the folks.

It’s difficult to imagine that the intelligence unit under fire off an on for seven hours would never have requested military assistance to save the lives of the people in the compound — not impossible, perhaps, but certainly implausible.

But surely you understand that the guys in the building radio’ing back to HQ while under attack are not the guys that would actually make the call on what to send in and how to respond. It sounds as of you want to make these two facts mutually exclusive. Just because the guys on the ground, at what has turned out to be a CIA base of operations, were asking for “everything”, doesn’t exactly mean that the CIA, or command, requested it.

And does nobody here wonder what exactly it was the CIA was engaged in their at that annex? That perhaps, as with most things CIA and has historically been the case, they want to keep it a secret?

The CIA sometimes has to do dirty things. Those “rough men in the night” you hear about.

Does everything have to be a big conspiracy? Is truth your goal or politics? A question I feel should be asked more often.

So we’re to believe that no assistance was provided because the CIA never requested it? How does that square with Obama supposedly ordering his national security team to do “whatever was necessary” to aid the beleagured personnel in Benghazi?

if CIA was really running some detentions there, extra-legally, would they perhaps have NOT requested assistance, thinking that a full blown big mil response would uncover it. and that getting people out, leaving a few guys behind to hopefully tamp it down, and end it there without big mil presence. they guessed wrong; they’re couple guys couldnt contain it, and they were sacrificed. and presumably, knew the deal when they were left there. if all this is correct.

I, also, don’t believe Patreous will reveal anything other than what he is told. A) If he tells the truth now he will have perjured himself B) He has already dishonored himself and his country. Why would he turn good now?

So whom did Dear Leader “order” to give them all the assistance they needed, to assure their safety? And why did he do this if no assistance was requested? Did not Comrade Chairman Obama order the military to provide assistance? Were his instructions not followed?

Looks like Petraeus has been selected as the fall guy for Teh One, the guy who just canned him for something supposedly unrelated to Benghazigate, after likely misleading him he could keep his position, and that President Billy Jeff got away with without losing his position.

It’s The Chicago Way.

However, there are some flaws in this fiction. Did Ambassador Stevens only request help from the CIA when he realized his life was in danger? Were all his requests routed through and screened by the CIA? Did the State Department only request assistance and help from the CIA? All of this seems highly unlikely.

So whom did Dear Leader “order” to give them all the assistance they needed, to assure their safety? And why did he do this if no assistance was requested? Did not Comrade Chairman Obama order the military to provide assistance? Were his instructions not followed?

farsighted on November 15, 2012 at 9:32 AM

if DL didnt know about the detentions, which he surely wouldnt if CIA was running them extra-legally, keepng him of course out of the loop, as it appears most things get done in dc now, everyone has to work around DL, then DL says “uh, so am i supposed to say, give them all they want? is that right?”. panetta says, yes sir, thats right, thats what you should say. and petreus, who is covering the presence of the detention, doesnt ASK. he got most of them out, the 30 in tripoli, leaves a few behind to secure annex. certianly doesnt want big mil there, as anyone who knows how this works, once big mil shows up, its a mess, everything gets out. just spitballong here. but i think most of the scandals we’ll see for the next 4 years will be everyone with any repsonsibility working around potus. and potus basically unknowing of anything substantive. which is bascially the way its been the last 4 years.

If Petraeus tells the truth he might as well as well pop a cyanide pill
because they will destroy whatever is left of his life . They will take
his pension , prosecute him , throw him in jail and the same with the
girlfriend .

I, also, don’t believe Patreous will reveal anything other than what he is told. A) If he tells the truth now he will have perjured himself B) He has already dishonored himself and his country. Why would he turn good now?

Do you think this guy would be acting CIA director if he wasn’t in the tank for Obama?

The rationale I’m reading is akin to a woman in a house that is being held hostage by an armed intruder and is under the threat of death but the police won’t come to her aid until she picks the phone up and dials 911.

Who cares if they didn’t request military assistance. It was obvious they were in need of assistance. Why wait to be invited?

The lies just keep on coming. Pretty soon, they’ll collapse under their own weight.

Anyone think about the fact we lost an very high ranking Admiral, and 3, 4 star generals in the past month?

Ever think that this is an Alinsky full frontal attack on our military?

karenhasfreedom on November 15, 2012 at 9:37 AM

I think it’s a way to undermine the military in order to soften up the public for Pentagon cuts. Those are the only cuts the Left ever endorses, but they know how they usually play politically. Might be different, though, if they can lower people’s opinion of our armed forces…

It is clear why he would say that. Those CIA operatives who went to assist after being told to stand down are now discredited or rogue and cannot be considered “legitimate” CIA ‘requesters!’ Barry will always have a demented twist to the truth. There is much evil in Washington these days.

because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied.

They shouldn’t have had to call TWICE for support. Support should have been sent as soon as they heard they were under attack, with the president finding out 50 minutes into the attack. NEO operations have been conducted all over the world, even in hostile environments. I trained for them when I was in the military under this very scenario.

Hostile Environment. Noncombatants may be evacuated under conditions ranging from civil disorder, to terrorist action, to full-scale combat. Under such conditions, the JTF must be prepared for a wide range of contingencies. The JFC may elect to deploy a sizable security element with the evacuation force or position a large reaction force, either with the evacuation force or at an intermediate staging base (ISB). In addition to normal functions associated with noncombatant evacuations (embarkation, transportation, medical, and services), the JTF may be required to conduct a forcible entry operation, establish defensive perimeters, escort convoys, participate in personnel recovery (PR) operations, and perform the screening of evacuees normally accomplished by DOS officials.

And there is also this:

Military Response. Normally, the JFC receives authorization from the supported CCDR before using any forces and facilities in a foreign country for protection and evacuation. However, if a JFC receives a request from the ambassador or responsible US diplomatic representative to provide assistance and the delay in obtaining authorization would jeopardize the safety of US citizens, the JFC should respond to the extent deemed necessary and militarily feasible.

A responsible US dimplomatic representative would have been Doherty or Woods when they called for assistance, since delaying did jeopardize their safety. This was already in place and has been for years! Why it wasn’t adhered to baffles me. This is what needs to be asked.

This is different Holder is now in the crosshairs. He “supposedly” withheld from the president that Obama CIA director was being investigated by the FBI.

That’s why I have hope, Every part of Obama’s adminstration, State, Attorney general, FBI, CIA, Department of defense, White house are all involved at the highest levels. Plus, the 4 dead heroes will be a clarion call to the truth seekers.

I have a picture on my work computer desktop of the Tomb of the Unknown Solider. My coworker came by and said he can’t understand why we spend money on something like that. He’s okay with the 26 year old kids on health insurance but thinks guarding the Tomb is a “waste” of money.

I almost punched him in the nose.

gophergirl on November 15, 2012 at 9:21 AM

I’m sorry you didn’t respond with a “what do you mean by that?” “How is it a waste of money?” These people are cowards. You don’t have to punch them in the nose, you only have to challenge them directly and they slink away like the scum that they are.

IMO, the reality is that your co-worker probably has no clearly defined idea what is and is not a waste of taxpayer money. It’s socialization among liberals and not thought that provoked that response.

But Morell’s explanation, as related by Lake, doesn’t make a lot of sense.

It makes a lot of sense. Petraus had to report through the chain of command which includes an intelligence czar, a political appointment with little intelligence experience or none. Adding that layer to the intelligence community a few years ago was a disaster as I suggested on these pages years ago.

That’s why I have hope, Every part of Obama’s adminstration, State, Attorney general, FBI, CIA, Department of defense, White house are all involved at the highest levels. Plus, the 4 dead heroes will be a clarion call to the truth seekers.

Danielvito on November 15, 2012 at 9:54 AM

First step in staging a coup and becoming a dictatorship- throw the existing government in utter turmoil. Just saying.